I’m currently trying to figure out how to get a Traditional Conservative to understand RP concepts. One of my best friends whom I’ve known for almost 20 years is someone who believes it’s always a man’s fault if his wife cheats, and he also thinks it doesn’t mean anything if a woman’s had sex before marriage. He and I are the only ones in that group of friends who isn’t married, and I’d like to help him understand certain truths before he finally does get married, but he’s the kind of person to whom you can’t tell anything.

Changing strongly held beliefs is extremely difficult because they are closely associated with a person’s identity. This is in itself not a bad thing, as it wouldn’t be an improvement if Hank’s friend changed his views each time the wind blew in a different direction.

From Hank’s description his friend’s paradigm fits closely with what I’ve dubbed Women’s sacred path to marriage. More importantly, this paradigm is almost certainly crucial to his friend’s view of himself as a man with a high Sexual Market Value (SMV) and especially Marriage Market Value (MMV). The twisted thinking goes like this:

Women are attracted to good and noble men.

I am better and more noble than other men.

Therefore I am more attractive than other men.

There is of course one small problem with this line of reasoning, which is that the women around Hank’s friend aren’t acting in a way that would suggest that they find him attractive. At the same time, the women around Hank’s friend are demonstrating attraction for unworthy men. This must mean that less worthy men than Hank’s friend are tricking women, essentially impersonating him. These fakers are getting in the way of women realizing how attractive he really is.

All of the observable data can be made to fit in this theory. Women riding the carousel for many years before suddenly marrying a beta provider is proof that eventually women see through the fake versions of himself and find the real deal. Once women find the real deal they of course remain committed for life as faithful loving wives. If they subsequently cheat and or divorce, this is only proof of another faker, a man who claimed to be as noble and good as Hank’s friend but was really like all of those other unworthy men. These fraudsters are even worse than the men on the carousel, because they took the deception even farther by tricking the woman into marriage.

When you tell a man like Hank’s friend that virtue isn’t what drives women’s sexual attraction, you are telling him he isn’t really at the top of the SMV pile and instead is towards the bottom. He has no doubt already contemplated this terrifying possibility, and doubling down on denial is his preferred strategy. This won’t be easy to break through.

There is another related aspect to the psychology of men like this, and this is viewing themselves as the noble rescuer of the weak. Under this delusion, his goodness and nobility are not only confirmed, but they will ultimately lead to him having a lifetime of sex with a very attractive woman. The woman who cheats on her husband is the innocent victim of two men who are beneath our hero’s status. Our hero swoops in to rescue her, saving her from the man who tricked her into marriage as well as the man who lured her to cheat when she was vulnerable (having been trapped in an unhappy marriage).

This fantasy won’t be easy to dispel, and in most cases it probably isn’t possible. To the extent that it is possible, my focus would be on discussing what it really means to be a good and noble man, and what it really means to protect the innocent. One way to approach this is to change the focus of protection from sexy sluts to innocent and vulnerable children.

What duty does Hank’s friend have to his future children, to ensure that they don’t have the pain of growing up in a broken home and/or a mother who behaves in ways that bring great shame to them? Surely he has failed his children if he fails to protect them from this. Challenge him to promise that he will do everything in his power to protect his future children in this way.

Once he has agreed that he has this obligation to his future children, focus on how he should go about keeping this promise. Start by asking him if he takes marriage vows seriously. Would he divorce or cheat if he fell out of love or he became unhappy, or would he keep his solemn vow? This one is easy because it fits with his view of himself as more noble than the average man. Then switch to how he would choose a wife, and what he would expect of her regarding her own vows. His assumption is of course that women almost always divorce and cheat because their husband was a fake version of himself. Yet just by being the real deal he hasn’t eradicated the entire threat to his children. Even a small chance of harming innocent children should be enough to motivate a man as good and noble as he is. While for other men the risk is that they won’t be the real deal, in his case the risk is that the woman fails to keep her marriage vows even though her husband is good and noble.

Assuming he agrees that he has a duty to protect his own future children from divorce and/or infidelity by carefully vetting a future wife, the next obvious question is would he do everything in his power to protect other innocent children as well? Is his role as protector of the weak in general, or does he only care enough to protect his own kids? Since other men aren’t the real deal (him), this means that he needs to insist that even unhappy wives of men lower than himself need to honor their marriage vows (at least if they have children). It isn’t just his own children who deserve an honorable mother; all children do.

As you work your way through this you will be forcing him to choose between two views he holds dear. Will he rescue the slut and be rewarded for this nobility with a lifetime of hot sex? Or will he choose instead to protect innocent children? Which does he choose, sex, or protecting the innocent? Does he choose sex with hot sluts, or true sexual morality?

Realistically he is extremely unlikely to abandon his current view of sexual morality, because the pain of admitting that he isn’t above other men in SMV is too much to accept. The response in most cases will be irrational anger and comical attempts at rationalization. Be patient, gentle, and respectful. All you can do is try to help him move towards true sexual morality; you can’t force him to adopt it. To the extent that you are able to help him in this journey, it will most likely be a slow process as he sorts it over in his mind. As Cane Caldo noted in a discussion some time ago, don’t be surprised if he ultimately comes back to you with an epiphany about sexual morality that he came to all by himself. Don’t worry about credit if that happens, just take the win.

132 Responses to Why he won’t hear it.

Christian men are especially easy prey for this kind of thinking. I keep seeing young Christian women dating non-Christian men at my Christian college and I have come up with the simple conclusion that most Christian guys are just milquetoast.

Sounds like Hank’s friend is a Gamma male, as in a man who puts all women on a pedestal. Typically a “male feminist”, but usually just a guy who has delusions about himself and how the socio-sexual marketplace works.

The best way to deal with him is to simply ask him how his views on women have helped in the dating market. Confronting him with reality will be tough, even if you are his best friend, but as long as it is done in the correct manner, he will begin to turn around.

Alternatively, you could encourage him to try and be a better man for himself. Go to the gym, eat better (I’d bet he’s not taken good care of himself over the years), etc.

Either way, it’s a long road of recovery for Hank’s friend and a hard one largely because of his own delusions which in place to protect himself from the truth.

The interesting bit about the mindset of “Hank” is that a lot of it is also the result of the logical fallacies within modern “Christian” culture. The “logic path” for how to handle relationships always ends with “Men will just be abused”, yet even the barest of understanding of the Bible points out that isn’t the way it’s supposed to work among Christians. So those Men less inclined to work out the error they’re seeing will double down on self-deception.

I’m reminded of how I ended up in this part of the Internet. I’ve mentioned before that I’m the son of a Widow. One of the practical aspects of this is a quick understanding that you have to learn how to “Be A Man”, but you don’t have someone in your life (daily) of which you can just pattern yourself. My mother did a wonderful job of keeping me involved with a number of Christian Men while growing up, so I actually ended up with a comparative view of the topic. I got to judge things that worked and things that didn’t, without too many perceived notions. This lead me to this part of the Internet not because I couldn’t get relationships, but due to the way they end. Women are emotional, but they don’t run super hot then ice cold suddenly. Especially when you’re “doing it right”. It was pretty obvious that “doing it right” was, in fact, quite wrong. (Even if it was exactly how everyone else is currently operating. Mass acceptance does not equal effectiveness.)

Without falling into the “No True Scotsman” fallacy, I do view much of the reason we got this far down the Road to Hell comes back to “Cultural Christianity”. Everyone wants their salvation & absolution, but almost no one wants God. Or “For many are called, but few are chosen.” (Matthew 22:14 ESV)

But neither should we give up our Hope. Whether you help lead 1 or 1 million to see the Truth, the work is always worth the reward. But remember that the results are not something you should expect to see in this life. The rewards last beyond the Hall of Time.

When attempting to persuade men about the Red Pill, start with the low-hanging fruit. The highest branch is Pedestalization. That is a branch with fruit to be harvested last.

A relatively low branch is women’s responsive sexuality which may be introduced by a study of sexual dynamics. Men are always “on”, but women always have the potential to be “on”. Women aren’t asexual. It’s a subtle but important difference.

Another relatively low branch is what Blue Pillers think that women find attractive in men–leadership. What are two primary attributes of leaders? Status and confidence. Hit on these. Use these to explain why women find athletes, politicians, actors, and musicians attractive.

Point out the ways that men excel over women:

1. 3x as many men as women have IQs over 130. Impacts medicine, engineering, and science heavily.
2. Men are better risk takers, leading to more entrepreneurship and job-creation.
3. Men are much stronger, making them more suitable for mining, agriculture, and ground combat.
4. Men excel at analysis because their minds are less susceptible to emotional confusion. This especially impacts political decisions and voting.
5. Men excel at direct communication and problem solving.

Point out how women need protection:

1. Women’s bodies are more susceptible to STDs. CDC statistics.
2. Pregnancy.
3. Physical weakness makes them more likely to be targets of criminals.

Vive la difference!

With churchians, you might try studying the Song of Solomon together.

Things to avoid:

1. Anything that can be answered by blaming men.
2. Anything that can be answered by NAWALT. Avoid “quality women” arguments.

That’s a very good analysis of the rationalization process involved, Dalrock. Unfortunately, I think even using care for children is pretty unlikely to work in changing the thought process. Men like this (I used to be one) generally have difficulty making any sort of necessary compromise or possible failure real in their minds.

Fundamentally, this is all about a deep-seated need for security. Men like this feel a lack of observable power over their circumstances, and so convince themselves that some virtue, some je ne sais quoi that they have will prevent them from having to possess true mastery over their circumstances, or to entertain the possibility of failure, compromise or doubt. As a result, they tend to not take risks that might shatter that illusion or associate with people that challenge their concept of virtue, and any thought process that shines a light on potential failure is seen as being inconsequential or absurd. Divorce? That only happens to sinners.

Hank’s friend wants to feel in perfect control over his relationship circumstances.

Ultimately, this will lead to co-dependent type relationships – relationships wherein he will need to be needed by her. Such men are very vulnerable to the abject neediness of emotional vampires, women with personality issues that cause them to desperately cling to men who seem willing to swoop in and ‘save’ them.

In spite of whatever appearance of strength, men like Hank’s friend have a core vulnerability – a sense that, if they fail, they are unworthy, contemptible, small, weak, unloveable. That’s why they so desperately avoid the impression that failure is always a possibility. And that core vulnerability is something they are invariably unaware of. It is the most hidden part of themselves – even from themselves. It manifests only in vaguely narcissistic thought processes like the one you described in the OP, and perhaps in mild pathologies like slight social anxiety or depression/lack of motivation. Or hyper-motivation/scrupulosity.

In my personal case, I was never able to explore an autonomous reality when I was very young due to the influence of an older brother with BPD – it was all about him, all the time, and any attempt to assert your own views or preferences were met with swift, often vicious, retribution. And so I learned to find power internally, in a sort of ‘fantasy of virtue,’ a reality wherein I was actually the powerful one – but only to those wise enough to see it. Instead of facing reality head-on, I would only do so when I was sure things would turn out the way I wanted them to. And the only thing that could break me out of it was the abject, complete failure of a relationship that I couldn’t deny I had cared about, and that I couldn’t deny I had tried everything I knew to fix.

It was enlightening to see how strongly I avoided the sense that I had failed, even then. And how hard I fought to avoid failure, even when it was clear the relationship wasn’t really the best option for me. The amount of pain it caused was staggering. A less healthy, socially-supported man might have committed suicide ten times over during that time. So this is actually a perilous thing to play with. Issues like this are rooted in profound pain, often very deeply buried. They are not solved by epiphanies (though those are a necessary part of the process) but the confrontation of the fiery lashes of shame, by men who by twist of fate never learned to endure them.

Outcomes in this sort of case are unpredictable. I was stubborn, so I like to think I’m the start of an inspiring success story 😉 but it’s never an easy road.

You can just attack this as a failure of thought patterns or beliefs, and attack it from that angle. In fact, I encourage it – I would never have found the Manosphere, or I would have bounced off it hard, if I hadn’t been introduced to some of its ideas in high school (traditional gender roles were taught) and biology (Karen Straughn was a great pre-redpill intro, though you have to be into biology and down with human evolution for that one to stick).

@Mike
“Christian men are especially easy prey for this kind of thinking. I keep seeing young Christian women dating non-Christian men at my Christian college and I have come up with the simple conclusion that most Christian guys are just milquetoast.”

Making excuses on behalf of rebellious women won’t do any good. What you’ve said is just another way of saying that “there’s no good men left” and we know this to be false.

It is so, so true – and something I still struggle with. The only other thing I would add, is the “just world fallacy” which so many Christians believe in. And in a just world, I would have a beautiful woman beside me…

Many Muslim guys are just as bad, they live with the promise that “the one” is out there, if their families just find her. While she may have had less (or no) sex, there’s no guarantees she won’t divorce him (in Western cultures) and take cash and prizes. Some of the variables of his views, and the outcomes depends on the origins of both families. In some cases, Muslim men maintain frame all the way through (with strong social/cultural/familiar ties ensuring it). It’s been observed by several RP Muslims (like myself) that many White Female Converts (particularly in the UK) get completely blindsided by reality once married–which is ALWAYS portrayed as though they are the victims of a big misunderstanding and violent men…much of which is not true.

One well known convert in the UK, can’t recall her name, wound up stabbing her boyfriend, and one of her first defenses was “he stabbed himself”. She went all Arias in her defenses. Point being. AWALT.

I am not sure I would say that the man’s mindset is almost completely driven by his own self assessment of his SMV. You also mix MMV in there a bit, but even that is not always the driving factor. Otherwise all of those men would also be thin and in good shape, for the Bible proclaims the value of fasting, etc.

I would say the core belief is that the view of what is “right” is skewed. Fixing that is non trivial, as you correctly note, but it is a slightly different target.

The question ultimately comes down though to how many men are driven by logic and how many are driven by emotions. That answer would guide the approach, though not necessarily the core principles.

theasdgamer: the best way to turn a guy RP, is to continually “double down” on any White Knighting he does, as with any satire (think Jonathan Swift), and set the framework to realize how completely farcical his actions are.

RP buddy: Uh, dude, I think you need to at LEAST spend $15k, and propose somewhere a bit more exotic, like Spain or something (completely straight faced). I’ve met Julie and she’s a bit too special to set such a low standard.

KEEP doubling down on every single subject, even if he notes HE and his Special Snowflake are the exception to your otherwise RP world-view…until he starts asking HIMSELF questions {why does MY Julie need a BMW SUV, why not a Honda? Why does MY Julie require she stay at home AND have a nanny…why does MY Julie”

If he ever disagrees, you quite seriously have to out Knight him…”dude, this isn’t just ANY girl, this is your special gal…do what it takes to make it happen. MTFU bro”. Let him ride his white horse all he way to divorce court, years later–he was going to anyhow. You’re there to raise the questions in his mind, that’s all you can do.

If your point isn’t to help him, it’s to make an example of him. Sorry, that’s the only way this will end.

I keep seeing young Christian women dating non-Christian men at my Christian college and I have come up with the simple conclusion that most Christian guys are just milquetoast.

Keep in mind, the princesses of the King have been fed their own line from Churchianity.

We are rightfully chalked about the messages from Fireproof, Courageous, and War Room. Flip the table and imagine what message it tells young Christian girls. Of courseI th=ey can take the risk with the non-Christian, because everyone tells them how super empowered they are with God and how God listens to Christian women all the time when they say, “I’ll duck so you hit him, God.”

Great post, Dalrock. It seems like at a certain point a lot of redpill-followers forget how the bluepill-perspective rationalizes itself. This is a great outline of how to start gently, subtly unraveling that perspective using the very base of rationalization they depend upon.

“the pain of admitting that he isn’t above other men in SMV is too much to accept”
This is true even with redpill acceptance. Even with all the knowledge of the truth of socio-sexual dynamics that I have, I find myself struggling with it (in certain respects). How much more so while still in a bluepill perspective!

Realistically he is extremely unlikely to abandon his current view of sexual morality, because the pain of admitting that he isn’t above other men in SMV is too much to accept.

The pincer is the pain/disappointment of acknowledging the morality of the women currently in his life; the women he likes, his female friends, his sisters and cousins, his mom… All those women he’s been protecting from his own clear-eyed judgement with his delusions; especially if he wants to get married. Who will be left worth trusting?

This describes how men who are not successful at 27 are unlikely to become so, and how this lack of success impacts their happiness and well being. Although the connection isn’t made in the article it made me think of your blog post on the missing the signal.

This one discusses how the delay in marriage and older parenting effect society and includes the risks of being an older father. Interesting because even if men manage to become successful despite not getting the signals from women they and their children are still harmed by women delaying marriage.

These articles provoked good conversation in an all female space, but of course it was very focused on what this meant for women.
*back to lurking*

I recently had cause to put pen to paper and post my letter to a friend of some decades. My friend thinks that he is God’s gift to the female sex, the true Alpha male, the successor to Casanova; he is the only person who believes this, and for reasons which I won’t go into I (as I said) felt the time had come where he had to be informed of the undeniable truth. Predictably, he has not communicated with me since receiving the letter and is doubtless busy doubling-down and rebuilding the mound.

“The woman who cheats on her husband is the innocent victim of two men who are beneath our hero’s status. Our hero swoops in to rescue her, saving her from the man who tricked her into marriage as well as the man who lured her to cheat when she was vulnerable (having been trapped in an unhappy marriage).”

Heroic Single Mothers and ‘their’ children being rescued by Heroic White Knights… Just one more hero and she’ll be truly and forever saved. And so will ‘her’ children. Just one more damsel in distress and he’ll be forever flattered… and the sex will be hot, hawt, haught! Until it isn’t… Ego Investments, addictions and vices die hard.

Heroic White Knightery is the flip side of Heroic Single Motherhood. Both of which create Serial Monogamy which inevitably replaces the White Knight who’s armor loses it’s ‘shine’ over time.

How does the White Knight explain his own replacement ~ ? …he blames other men of course. How does the White Knight explain his own culpability as he replaces other men ~ ? …he blames those men whom he’s replacing. How does the White Knight explain his inability to protect innocent children, his loss of status, income and respectability ~ ? …he doesn’t – and therein lies his Achilles Heel. This is where the White Knight crashes and burns. And so be it.

The lesson to the Heroic White Knight is the same message to all men : he’s disposable. What the modern day White Knight needs to learn is that his counter part, the Heroic Single Mother has another, bigger and better White Knight to rescue her and ‘her’ kids ~ it’s called the Federal Govt., State mandated, media maintained and nation wide. He’s “Bona-fide”.

The White Knight – to realize he’s been a tool for the Feminine Imperative is the first step towards masculine recovery. The second step is to realize other men are his brothers, fathers and sons and not creepers, rapists and losers. The more White Knights implode the quicker men overall can come together as a cooperative group. Wishful thinking, I know, but I can’t help it. Men helping each other as men instead hindering each other like a bunch of back stabbing, status seeking idiots. Destroying each other for power and status to gain the female’s ever changing approval, acceptance and attention is a game for deluded, self serving, short sighted men of which we currently way too many.

I say let those White Knights crash and burn – let them come up against losing ‘their’ children – let them feel the loss of home, family, status and meaning as their armor fades and falls apart and they are in turn labeled the ‘bad man’. If they survive they’ll come crawling into places like Dalrock and other manospherian sites where they can read, learn, repent and red pill – like the rest of us men who’ve learned the hard way. If they don’t survive then that’s ok too – one less idiot in our way.

I think one of the biggest problems often not addressed is the source of a Blue Pill man’s views on these matters and how they’re inextricably linked. In other words, who taught him to believe what he believes, and what does he think of them?

More often than not, they are people or entities which he holds as the highest authority in his life, the ones who had an indispensable role in raising him. In the Trad Con community, the church and family/parents tends to instill these values, though it may be different for the subject of this post.

He may be unable to the reject his current view of sexual morality and his perception of SMV because to swallow the Red Pill is to acknowledge that these people, people who he might love and highly respect, misinformed or misled him. The people whom he trusted implicitly to teach him what he needed to know about things like women and marriage not only didn’t but they taught falsehoods that require him to completely reassess his understanding of these issues on his own.

When men are offered the Red Pill, it logically requires them to reject a perception they might have had of important people in their lives. What is a Blue Pill man thoroughly inundated in the feminine narrative from childhood supposed to think of his father or mother or church leaders once he’s taken the Red Pill and discovers how much of what he so willing accepted as truth from them were lies? It opens up a huge pandora’s box; what else did they lie to him about?

Chances are, even if unplugged, these people in his life will continue to push this narrative, perhaps even harder if they see that he no longer believes in it. It puts him in a horribly vexing situation of trying to have a relationship with people who failed to use their authority to teach him truth and persist in teaching things that he now realizes would guarantee misery and hardship in any relationship he enters. An immense amount of trust and respect is destroyed and, if it’s bad enough, it necessitates severing relationships or reducing them to a minimal level.

The pain of admitting these things isn’t always a reflection of a man’s perceived self-worth or ego investment, but an indication of how it would impact other fundamental beliefs in his life.

Thanks for the careful consideration, Dalrock, (and others). I’ve got some things going on at the moment, so I’ll write more when I have more time and can read all the comments, but in meantime, if you want, we can give my friend an alias just to make things easier. As rabbi from Seinfeld would say, “Let’s call him ‘George.'” 🙂

“you are telling him he isn’t really at the top of the SMV pile and instead is towards the bottom. He has no doubt already contemplated this terrifying possibility, and doubling down on denial is his preferred strategy. This won’t be easy to break through.”

I doubt it. Ten years ago I was Hank’s friend, complete with a lot of the misconceptions you note. My take on my SMV is the reverse of what you’re saying here. I figured for some mysterious reason I was near the bottom (mediocre women loved giving me nuclear rejections), though I occasionally contemplated the possibility I was near the top but something was off somewhere (i.e. the ugly duckling).

Once I discovered the manosphere, I figured out what was off, and ended up with a reasonably high SMV, lack of prior practice preventing perfection.

Don’t assume that Hank’s friend is even aware of an alternative to his worldview, although younger men today often are.

He won’t hear it likely because his mindset and his skill set is frozen in time somewhere in the past, quite possible back when he was 20 or even younger. I’ve seen frivorced men over 40 start talking and acting like high schoolers or college undergrads, because that’s where their social skill set froze.

Men with this mindset are like the apochryphal Polish cavalry charging with swords at German tanks in 1939. They are trying to deal with a modern world using out of date facts, and that often tends to end badly. Suspect that most men won’t even look at The Glasses until the cognitive dissonance between “ought to be” and “is” is so painful that believing pretty lies hurts more than looking at reality.

Remember, getting a man to see reality about women can be very much like this scene
from They Live.

He’s not a “Traditional” Conservative by any definition. His beliefs (fornication ok, adultery justified sometimes) are factually not traditional. Not even conservative.

He doesn’t think fornication and adultery are morally OK or justified as much he just believes that a man (a real man I guess) shouldn’t have to worry about how his wife’s prior fornication is going to affect her and her future marriage to him. That is, if a man’s doing things right sexually, then he’s got nothing to worry about in terms of his wife comparing him to her prior lovers. Likewise, if a man’s wife strays, then it’s always (yes, he specifically used that word) the husband’s fault for not leading her correctly.

@Anonymous Reader:
Charging with swords? Not with sabers? 🙂 It was a charge against infantry, not tanks:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_at_Krojanty
A tactical defeat, but at the same time a strategic victory. Well, the Nazi propaganda lives on, even today….

“the pain of admitting that he isn’t above other men in SMV is too much to accept”

This never bothered me, even before I was a Christian. Maybe because I didn’t know that there was an SMV. or how women really thought. There were always other men more desired by women, and there were always women who were attracted to me (though I didn’t know the real reasons why).

Now the way I look at it is that if a woman doesn’t appreciate the Christ like qualities in a man, then the problem is with her. If a man is not attractive to a woman who is only concerned with satisfying her baser impulses, I’d say that he dodged a bullet.

It was a hard thing to hear that women (even “good” women) have a flesh nature (lust) that desires BAD men.

A) We’ve been indoctrinated this is not the case.
B) If we have arranged our lives to be pleasing to women what are we to do when we find out it achieves the opposite.
C) Having constructed ourselves as the broken misfit toys of women how do we abandon the notion that we will get their praise (if not their sexual relations) and jump off the ladder where we are lauded by feminists over to where we are inscrutable and unknowable MEN. We want to be noticed and known by women, isn’t this alternate track opposite of our stated goals?

So men get stuck seeking women’s approval and never being satisfied with the reward (sex).

Yes, the day you finally get a clear-eyed RP view of your mother’s morality is the day your eyes are truly opened. You lose trust in ALL women. You accept that yes, AWALT. I had always thought it was just my bad luck that my wife and daughter turned out to be like that, but when I saw my mother’s self-centered reaction to my father’s debilitating bout with cancer and eventual death then I knew it was just a woman thing.

He doesn’t think fornication and adultery are morally OK or justified as much he just believes that a man (a real man I guess) shouldn’t have to worry about how his wife’s prior fornication is going to affect her and her future marriage to him. That is, if a man’s doing things right sexually, then he’s got nothing to worry about in terms of his wife comparing him to her prior lovers. Likewise, if a man’s wife strays, then it’s always (yes, he specifically used that word) the husband’s fault for not leading her correctly.

In other words: A husband who is not fucking his wife better than other men deserves to lose her to them. The grand unifying theory of Churchianity and Game.

If I were Hank, I would point out these statistics regarding woman’s N and likelihood of divorce – you can’t argue with statistics. (and if it doesn’t work just ask him if he’s hundred percent sure to be better lover (and better endowed) than all of her past ones)
Then I would talk about past behavior being the best predictor of future behavior (it may be wiser to start in different context). Regarding cheating being always husband’s fault, it would be good to point out Potiphar’s wife and Joseph.

He doesn’t think fornication and adultery are morally OK or justified as much he just believes that a man (a real man I guess) shouldn’t have to worry about how his wife’s prior fornication is going to affect her and her future marriage to him. That is, if a man’s doing things right sexually, then he’s got nothing to worry about in terms of his wife comparing him to her prior lovers. Likewise, if a man’s wife strays, then it’s always (yes, he specifically used that word) the husband’s fault for not leading her correctly.

Ouch.

It’s Adam’s fault that Eve at the fruit? Then why does God punish Eve?

So the fact that Hosea’s wife Gomer strayed was his fault?

It’s Uriah’s fault that Bathsheba was bathing where David could see her and they both willingly committed adultery?

Basically, it comes down to if he believes women have free will. If what he believes is true then women don’t have free will. They are always at the whims of a man’s leadership.

Why then are people rebellious against God’s leadership if we don’t have free will? Surely God’s leadership is stronger than man’s.

Like it or not you can have perfect leadership and people will still rebel because they embrace sin. See: Jesus.

Yeah, sounds like some macho posturing on the part of Hank’s friend rather than a serious argument. Maybe opening up about your own ups and downs with women can get him to reflect with more honesty and good faith (if he truly is a friend).

It’s interesting to understand Hypergamy and see friends or family like this. Been there done that. Female solipsism encourages white knights, and combine that with propaganda, school indoctrination, and piss poor real life role models, it’s no wonder most men don’t “get it”.
Hang in there if you got a family member or friend. I’ve slowly converted some, & some are still in denial. It sucks because you know they are suffering, but our ego-investment in the fairy tale is too strong to let go of.

There is a higher purpose for guys like H’s FG. I hope he finds his Special Snowflake™, puts her on a pedestal, has a couple of kids, and has her leave and frivorce rape him because she’s not happpppy.

No, it’s not. The only thing worse than being a total loser as a man is being a total loser with a wife who reinforces that every minute of the day with her conduct and character. Life is hard enough while being a total loser, but being a total loser is itself not the lowest that a man can go.

I think one of the biggest problems often not addressed is the source of a Blue Pill man’s views on these matters and how they’re inextricably linked. In other words, who taught him to believe what he believes, and what does he think of them?

More often than not, they are people or entities which he holds as the highest authority in his life, the ones who had an indispensable role in raising him. In the Trad Con community, the church and family/parents tends to instill these values, though it may be different for the subject of this post.

He may be unable to the reject his current view of sexual morality and his perception of SMV because to swallow the Red Pill is to acknowledge that these people, people who he might love and highly respect, misinformed or misled him.

This is an excellent point. Part of this very likely also leads back to his identity as a Christian (assuming he is Christian). There is a massive disconnect between the Bible/doctrine and Christian culture, and for nearly all Christians the culture is where the identity comes from.

Men who are deeply ego invested into the feminine matrix rarely wake up. I’ve got 50 year old acquaintances that still blame men for everything. They do not believe that women have agency. Rather they believe that women act perfectly, which was actually Satan’s plan. To force everyone to act good rather then God’s plan of granting us free will. So they are embracing Satan’s plan. This is how my church is. In apostasy.

My brother has been married for 16 years. His wife has cheated on him numerous times. Every time she comes back and they blame the other bad men together. He’s miserable but any attempt to wake him up to the truth is met with violent rejection. Even watching me get divorce raped he was unable to wake up. He simply lives in a bubble. If I start trying to broach any red pill subject his mind shuts down. I’ve seen it happen as he desperately tries to change the subject to some video game or sports team that he drowns himself in.

My oldest friend has been more receptive. After I told him to never speak to me again after he defended VAWA and the abuse I suffered in these secret courts. A week later he apologized and I was able to explain to him the true function (and meaning) of abuse. In modernity.

He has two sisters. One is a single mother with children from two men. No one in his family has ever held this woman responsible for her decisions. For picking drug dealing losers who both ended up in prison. Rather it’s always blame the men. His other sister is massively obese. 350 pounds at 5′ 2″. She has never had a man express interest in her but she has had a big crush on me for our entire lives.

I was able to make some headway by gently criticizing his sisters. By pointing out how one sister created the very abusive situations he then complains about. And by pointing out that his sister will die without ever feeling a man’s touch if she does not get weight reduction surgery and change her life. And that it is not any man’s responsibility to enter into a relationship with her.

It helped when I asked him about his relationships with women. And he started to connect some dots when I had him explain how women acted and compared this to what they said.

Still lately he’s sunk back into the blame men for everything and never hold a woman accountable for anything. All women’s actions are men’s responsibility. Women aren’t people. Rather they have fallen for Satan’s plan and hence no longer have agency.

As far back as high school noticed that pick up artists and all of those jerks who consistently won with women, held women in contempt. Part of getting the red pill is the questions; Are the on to something? Does their consistent success come from knowing the truth?
Face it if Godlyness or vritures made women wet, most social problems would disappear.

Mariah8That truly drives home the point of how blue pill men are the real “sexists”.

Blue pill men are ignorant. Sometimes willfully so. But on this site, at least in my opinion, the word “sexist” has no meaning. It’s an invented word standing on the blank-slate premise with a dash of cultural Marxism. It’s part of the 2nd stage feminist shaming kit, usually reached for when anything remotely resembling facts has failed.

Sounds like Hank’s friend is a Gamma male, as in a man who puts all women on a pedestal. Typically a “male feminist”, but usually just a guy who has delusions about himself and how the socio-sexual marketplace works.

I even told him his views were feminist, and instead of getting offended, he actually thought that idea was kind of funny, due to its irony. In his mind, he’s the farthest thing from a feminist.

Alternatively, you could encourage him to try and be a better man for himself. Go to the gym, eat better (I’d bet he’s not taken good care of himself over the years), etc.

I think he’s in pretty good shape at the moment, since he’s been training for marathons these last few months, but prior to that and for the past few years, you’re right that he put on quite a bit of pudge from going to bars and drinking heavily. He’s often done that when he’s been lonely and depressed. When I saw him a few weeks ago, he had slimmed down and was looking pretty healthy, though, so maybe he’s starting to go in the right direction there.

Either way, it’s a long road of recovery for Hank’s friend and a hard one largely because of his own delusions which in place to protect himself from the truth.

The Question @ 2:00 pm:
“I think one of the biggest problems often not addressed is the source of a Blue Pill man’s views on these matters and how they’re inextricably linked. In other words, who taught him to believe what he believes, and what does he think of them?

More often than not, they are people or entities which he holds as the highest authority in his life, the ones who had an indispensable role in raising him.”

I’ve seen this sort of thing in politics, too. Party/celebrity loyalty dominates any discussion I try to have about the Constitution and rule of law. Human nature seems less interested in following ideas than following people; therefore, countering an esteemed leader’s preachings with a mere concept would feel unnatural from the start.

It’s crazy to think that most peoples’ behavior is based more on group association than what they actually think is true… but it explains a lot of human behavior. Most of it, in fact.

Let’s try turning this around. “If a fugly woman isn’t attractive to a man who is only concerned with satisfying his baser impulses, I’d say that she dodged a bullet.”

This is Blue Pill churchian thinking at its finest.

I used to think you were wise, now I realize that you are just stubborn. As usual your way off base. Turning it around doesn’t change a thing, and I really don’t care what you have to say on the matter.

How about you just get it through your head that I don’t subscribe to the As gamer mode of thought, and YOU are not the great “red pill” patrol police chief you think yourself to be. Why do you even read my posts? I generally just skip yours anymore.

1 Samuel 9: God lays out what he is going to do to Israel because they demand a King and reject their Lord in the process. Their society had outlasted every other society in the region by hundreds of years. (While people lived in the other places, they kept getting new regimes and being conquered every few dozen years.) But the pull of the World was finally too strong. They wanted a new Golden Calf. But the Lord has other plans for what he was going to do with a King of Israel.

@The Question:

This goes to the entire topic, but it dawned on me that the place to start (with Christians) is a discussion on Honor. Not on “being honorable”, directly, but on what the word means in context of how we are supposed to use it. The word simply means to “properly weigh/measure” someone. It’s not to glorify them, just to properly weigh their value. (In the Ancient Hebrew, the implication is the weight of gold; in the Greek, it’s to place a price tag.)

I suggest starting there for two reasons. Firstly, it’s a topic that’s going to set someone rooted in “Tradition” into a state of glee. It’s one of those topics they’ll want to talk about, unless you start speaking Truth on the subject. The second is that it’s actually a skill that’s necessary for “taking the Red Pill” (or simply seeing much of what is right in front of your nose). You can’t deal with the Women in your life if you can’t properly value them. This is, at its core, is one of the drivers of the anger associated with the realizations of the thorough fantasy you’ve been taught. Both your personal Honor (hyper important to Men) and your ability to honor others is shattered in the process. We rarely honor liars and now everyone you know is one. It hurts, no question about that.

Try to look at this way. Child support laws and the penalties involved. Pulling driver’s licenses, medical licenses, jail. basically doing things that wreck the guy and make collecting money impossible. this isn’t done for the purpose of collecting it is done for the purpose of keeping the rest of you in line. Got the church in line. MGTOW,PUA, “where have all the men gone” created the manosphere. Let those guys be the target drones for the double down.
Look at the police in America. Crime is down the number of police killed annually is going down what do they do. They turn a traffic stop into a shooting or at least an arrest. It is just as valuable to have lost blue pill as it is to have red pill men inform other men of the truth. Let them be the training aids and examples for red pill training .
These stories you guys are posting up are awesome.

Hank’s friend is in Deep Blue Pill haze. Simple as that. It is right to try to tell him and show him that reality is different, but such words even by the best of friends is going against what a lifetime of programming – from Mother to Childcare to Kindergarten to school to college /university to church to television to movies tells him: The Female is Pre-eminent.
It is really only until something truly catastrophic happens, involving a woman and involving him or something or someone he cares about happens, that he will awake to the true nature of women. The the Blue to Red detox is sickening.
I was raised by a Stay at Home mother, with a hard man as a father, with whom I became inseparable at age 7. I had an awesome mentor at 17, yet I still went Blue Pill and had a sickening detox.
Hank: Introduce your friend to divorced friends. Introduce him to this blog. Talk to him about the statistics of divorce, frivorce, single motherhood, abortion, female cognitive dissonance. It might be a bitter pill to swallow, but if he’s your friend, he will value what you do for him. As many men say to me: “But I love women”! to which I say, “Yes. But that doesn’t mean you have to be blind to their aberrations”.

There is an easy way to convince married men that Red Pill and learning game works in a low sex marriage works.

I have a buddy. After hours of arguing and playing with his muscular hamster about me moderating Married Red Pill and telling him about my book on Dread I finally just said: “How many times a week do you have sex? I have sex 3-4 times a week, rain or shine.”

His look started out as shocked and slowly turned into disbelief, and then his head started shaking. “Wait, what? No way.”

“Way bro. Way. That game thing I am trying to get you to understand works on women and guess what? Lynne (his wife) is a woman.”

Somehow, in theasgamer’s mind, my comment “If a man is not attractive to a woman who is only concerned with satisfying her baser impulses, I’d say that he dodged a bullet.” means that I don’t see value in men following the example of the Male Lover in the Song of Solomon.

Therefore, according to “red pill sheriff” theasgamer thinking, that makes me “blue pill” and therefore the newbies must be warned. Carry on sheriff. Your repeated efforts to put words and meanings where they do not exist via the straw men that you build will be a testimony of your own ill intent.

There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers.

Many years ago, when I was married to my first wife, I was a high-profile church leader, saying all the right things about such matters, etc.

One of our members, a single mom was dragging her son to church every week, trying to raise him in the right environment, and so on. She dated once in a while but I never got the impression she was sexually active.

After some time, a guy moved to our town from out if state, also divorced and they hit it off. I remember at their wedding, he stood up and gave a toast something like this:

“I remember seeing her in the pew, week after week, by herself, surrounded by intact families. I knew what it was like to be looked down on by those families, even if they never said anything. That takes courage and knew I wanted to get to know a woman with that kind of character.”

They are still married, almost 20 years later, while my first (her a virgin) marriage failed. He is now a preacher.

I think about that sometimes because with my RP awareness when I hear speeches like that I roll my eyes because I hear the sappy fem-worship in it.

That was the early 90s, I think before unrestrained hypergamy really hit full stride. Maybe they were the exception.

I think this guy– hanks friend –is operating under the assumption that stories like that are the norm. I agree, D with your ascertions and much of the content of your advice. Men like Hanks friend are deeply invested in a narrative that may have been “true” at some point, but is definitely an outlier now.

I’m going to have to come out on the professors side, and gamers. We should be raising boys into men by teaching boys game. So they will internalize it.

Had I been game aware ten years ago I could have saved my marriage. And my son would not have suffered as he does. The stretch to move from a deep blue pill fog, through an awakening, and then to set out and learn game? To try to indoctrinate yourself into it? And to learn game with your modern slut?

It’s a big call here. My best suggestion is to cultivate your natural male superiority. Know that you are better than women. Not some women. You’re better than all women. It’s your calling and your Godly duty.

Do you really think that our Lord would call us to headship and to a position of leadership over women if we were not suited to the task?

Knowing that you’re better than all women is a good step to developing some natural game. And learning game really will show you that women are biological robots programmed to seek the most successful men.

We developed a society where the most successful men are players and cads. In a sick attempt to protect our women from any decision they make we created this society. Adapt to it and lead. As is your duty.

I still am uncertain what “game” is as I’ve heard many definitions. I like the “set of tools” definition best. I learned much of what some have labeled “game” from the Bible and my understanding is being fine tuned on blogs like this one.

My understanding from the Bible is that we should be teaching our boys to be men of God. That means they should learn to be Christ like (loving, joyful, peaceful, patient, long suffering, good, faithful, gentle and self-controlled), uncompromising in their devotion to God, and leaders in their families yet followers of Christ. They should be prayerful and well versed in the scriptures. They should be masculine while knowing the true nature of women and use such knowledge wisely.

I don’t think having those qualities guarantees that women will be attracted to them. In fact I’ve seen it. Again, I say a bullet dodged when the women is shallow (which is most of the time these days).

And learning game really will show you that women are biological robots programmed to seek the most successful men.
Define “success”. Secular, or biblical? The two are diametrically opposed.

We developed a society where the most successful men are players and cads.
The females servicing this type of “success” are not servants of God, and will find themselves annihilated at Armageddon.

In a sick attempt to protect our women from any decision they make we created this society. Adapt to it and lead. As is your duty.
I did not create this society, Sir; but in a way, it created me. Believe me, I have adapted. My duty is to myself, my wife second, and to contribute as minimally as possible to this world.

Right you are, The Question. I’ll actually call my friend “Jason,” since that’s a more likely name than “George” for a man in his 30s, but unlike Rabbi Glickman I still won’t be using my subject’s real name. 🙂

Anyway, Jason’s father has probably had the greatest impact on how Jason views women. Jason’s father, whom I’ll call Matthew, is generally an intelligent and wise man whom I also respect a lot, particularly concerning his understanding of certain aspects of scripture and doctrine, but he too is blue pill (or non-pill) when it comes to women, or at least he has been historically.

See, Matthew had the good fortune of marrying the woman he loved at age 18, so most of his understanding of women comes from his own limited experience. While Matthew did experience oneitis for a few months before his wife became his wife, he didn’t experience oneitis for as long or as frequently as most of us unmarried 30-somethings have experienced over the years. He also hasn’t been frivorced or cheated on to my knowledge. Ironically, though, another one of the other sons in their family experienced a cheating wife followed by a frivorce, so you’d think that experience would change their views on women some, but apparently, it hasn’t, at least not with Jason. I haven’t talked to Matthew about women in a while, so I’m not sure how his views might have changed over the years.

To demonstrate Matthew’s thinking on women or at least the type of thinking he had at one time, there was an instance years ago when Jason was interested in a girl at work, but she had a boyfriend at first. When she and her boyfriend broke up, Jason asked her out, but she said that she “wasn’t dating anyone for two months.” When Jason told his father what happened, Matthew replied and was serious in saying, “That’s great. Now, you’ve got two months to be friends.” Of course, we know it doesn’t work that way. Even I knew it at the time, as clueless as I was. By the way, the girl was naturally dating another guy in significantly less than two months.

Whether through direct counsel from his father or just things Jason has picked up on over the years, Jason’s views on women undoubtedly at least got their start from his well-meaning and generally wise and spiritual father, who certainly hasn’t lied to him but whose thinking about women was somewhat impaired, as well. This situation is similar to the one with my mother and me. My mother would love me to find love and get married, but she, being a good woman herself, but like most women in general, anyway, doesn’t understand the marketplace or that there even is one.

This never bothered me, even before I was a Christian. Maybe because I didn’t know that there was an SMV. or how women really thought. There were always other men more desired by women, and there were always women who were attracted to me (though I didn’t know the real reasons why).

I’d say this is exactly right on all points. As usual, Dalrock has good insight and advice in this thread, particularly the part about presenting Jason with the possibility of protecting his and other men’s children against divorce. Of course, Jason would actually have to see the connect between N-count and divorce probabilities, as Pilgrim of the East mentioned and as I’ve mentioned to Jason before. I’m not sure if he could accept that those things are highly connected, but I may just need to reiterate that particular point if we discuss it again.

However, I’d say Jason has almost no clue about SMV, except that like you, JDG, he knows that some men are more desired by women than others. He may just not know why, and in doing so, he actually sells himself short. Jason’s a knowledgeable and successful engineer with a bright future ahead of him. Also, again, he’s getting back in shape with these races he’s been training for. Therefore, Jason’s MMV (not SMV, though) may well be higher than he himself realizes, meaning that if he doesn’t start looking for love in all the right places (instead of bars) he could end up with someone who might take advantage of his naivete and go after his resources in a few years when he does in fact does find out that his wife doesn’t think he’s as good at sex as he thinks he is or will be compared to her prior lovers. Jason probably simply overestimates his SMV without even knowing what SMV is. Heck, I barely know what SMV is, but I’m not so audacious or naive as to think that if my wife has had prior partners that I’m suddenly going to be her best in her mind.

The guy is a lost cause. Save your energy. You cannot force red pill awareness on others.

Haha, indeed. I think I concluded something like that in the original thread, and Dalrock conceded how unlikely it is, as well here, but many of the arguments mentioned in this thread and the other one are at least sound advice to give someone with at least a partially open mind.

If a man is not attractive to a woman who is only concerned with satisfying her baser impulses

This reads like “I’m so spiritual that sex is irrelevant to me and I don’t need to bother with being sexy.”

Women will be attracted to sexy men, whether those men follow Christ or not. Following Christ will not necessarily make a man sexy. Your words imply that it ought to and women ought to find men who follow Christ sexually attractive.

This reads like “I’m so spiritual that sex is irrelevant to me and I don’t need to bother with being sexy.”

I’m sure in your mind that’s exactly how it reads. That’s not how it reads to me. Nor is it what I wrote.

Your words imply that it ought to and women ought to find men who follow Christ sexually attractive.

As you’ve repeatedly demonstrated, you are not qualified to render judgement on what my words imply.

It could be said that your words imply that a woman ought to ignore sound teaching and follow her baser instincts. Unlike you, I prefer not to try to put words in peoples mouths. So instead of accusing you, I wait and see. Right now what I see is a man who likes to sow discord.

I really think it takes pain to shock men free.
Unfortunately, that was true for me. Even the success (repeated successes) I had when I’d stumble into doing things right didn’t convince me to keep it up. I’d willfully regress into being a beta (or delta depending on whose scale you’re using) b/c I thought I was being mean acting like an alpha.

I hope he finds his Special Snowflake™, puts her on a pedestal, has a couple of kids, and has her leave and frivorce rape him because she’s not happpppy

You mean a 29 year old guy can’t tell the difference between a 14 year old girl and a 19 year old woman? I find that a bit difficult to accept.

Pics would help. My son’s in high school and girls are simply developing a lot faster nowadays. Some chalk it up to all the ingested hormones from meats. I don’t know the science, but I do know some girls age 14 do not look like 14 yo girls when I was in school.

She posed online as a 19yo crim justice student. She was able to stay out all weekend without checking in because she was a runaway (or “missing juvenile”). I think she picked that degree because of his career (armed security).

I could see how a guy could confuse a developed 14 yo girl with a 19yo, especially if she carried herself with confidence and didn’t have to “go home.”

When he found out, he contacted police right away. That’s not the sign of a guy who really thought she was 14 all along.

Therefore, Jason’s MMV (not SMV, though) may well be higher than he himself realizes, meaning that if he doesn’t start looking for love in all the right places (instead of bars) he could end up with someone who might take advantage of his naivete and go after his resources…

IMO merely shopping among the locals puts him at risk of being divorce raped. I will say that the last two guys I know that got blindsided by their wives (the most recent one just a couple of months ago) fared better in family court than most cases I’ve seen over the years. I hope that change is coming, but I’m not holding my breath.

JDG, I never understood the whiny sounding “Why do girls date jerks and bad boys?” question. Some girls did, and I thought that was a good indication of their character. The truly good ones did not, even though they may have had some level of basic biological attraction to men like that.

I never understood the whiny sounding “Why do girls date jerks and bad boys?” question. Some girls did, and I thought that was a good indication of their character.

Yes, and their flawed (sometimes willfully) approach toward finding a man who will take charge.

Heartiste once wrote: be interesting. I think that’s a way of saying, “have a purpose.” Women are attracted to that. All males should recognize that even having no more purpose than riding a Harley and living wild is more appealing to a woman than a milquetoast man who simply pedestalizes her.

And I’ll repeat my thesis: churches no longer help men find their purpose. Churches have leaders who are self-serving and look for weak people to support their vision. Men need to decide their Master, their Mission, then find a Mate. They can’t simply be the Mr. Rogers lapdogs to pastors. And the latter will be easier w/ the former two settled.

There’s a book w/ that title. I am projecting my opinion as I haven’t read it yet. But it’s a great thesis, and a HUGE part of Christian “game” IMO.

I am one of those “traditional conservatives” who took the red pill so long ago I can’t remember exactly how it occurred. My recollection is vague, but I believe it just had the ring of truth to it. Just spell it out for him. If he has a brain, it will sink in and he will realize it is true. Stop worrying how he might take it, how he might rationalize it away. Tell him, explain it, and don’t worry about him if he rejects the truth…

@Anchorman
Google for pics of Priscilla Presley when she was 14. Traci Lord started posing nude at 14 and doing porn flics at 15. Attitude and confidence goes a long way.

@GunnerQ
As far as hormones, it’s not the meat, it’s the birth control pills and environmental estrogens. I’ve seen 14-15 year old girls go from a B cup to a D cup just from birth control pills, and they’re still skinny. The early sexualization adds to the effect.

A gamma who is unattractive enough that harridans and bitches pass him by is at least saved from himself by his own unattractiveness.

He could ensure “saving himself from himself” by going all the way and cutting off his d1ck. No more temptations from harridans and bitches. Problem solved. Oh, wait, I’m forgetting something. He could have a use for his d1ck besides a woman.

Unlike you, I prefer not to try to put words in peoples mouths. So instead of accusing you, I wait and see.

I see a man who relies heavily on gnostic concepts to express his ideas. Those gnostic concepts are part and parcel of Blue Pill thinking. The flesh is evil. Sex is evil because it is the result of base instincts which come from the flesh. Women are better than men because their libidos aren’t always on. Men are evil because they instigate for sex. That’s the gnostic Blue Pill.

Opposed to Gnosticism is the Song of Solomon. There, I got a mention of it yet again. [wink]

Thanks, nice piece. I concede up front that much of my view on this comes from RC Sproul and RC Sproul Jr, two outspoken reformed speakers.

I would say however that the missionary in this instance is not a victim, he is willfully refusing to change despite all evidence and counsel that he should. I’ll also add that I spent several months attending an OPC and despite their pride on being reformed, they were sliding towards they same mistakes as other conservative Churches.

On the early sexualization/rapid physical development, there’s a few things going on. 1) More food available, which helps sexualization happen at roughly the same time frame it has since the 1960s. 2) Highly available Omega-6 fatty acids & high sugar content. Medicinal research “knows it doesn’t know” why the Omega 3 vs 6 balance is important, but it is and it contributes highly. (There are a lot of small hormones that should be discovered over the next few decades that control this stuff.) 3) Girls now wear such tight fitting clothes, it’s impossible not to notice it. Because they want you to see it.

I see a man who relies heavily on gnostic concepts to express his ideas.

You’ve convinced me that this is what YOU see.

The flesh is evil. Sex is evil because it is the result of base instincts which come from the flesh. Women are better than men because their libidos aren’t always on. Men are evil because they instigate for sex.

These are all against scripture, and not at all what I wrote. In fact much of what I write directly opposes these views. Your list, however, does reflect the straw man you try to use in your accusations. Carry on sheriff.

Bee @ 1:16 pm:
“This blog article has some good points for young men. But, I never heard sermons like this when I was a young man.”

It’s just as well. This article is pretty bad.

“Do you preach and teach purpose, what the family is created for? Do you teach the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth, have many children and through them take over the culture?”

The purpose of marriage is sex, not children. 1 Cor. 7. Also, our evil culture is a moral problem not a genetic one. You cannot outbreed evil. You confront evil instead, like clergy USED to do.

“He was a little uncomfortable to talk about the issue of having children … given the lower incomes of most people, having many children would place a heavy burden on the young parents.”

What a great way to convince people to attend church: order them to have kids even if they can’t afford kids. The rest of the paragraph is a succinct description of how the welfare state destroys family cohesion, not that the author noticed.

“A woman doesn’t need special courses in interpersonal relationships to be able to recognize emotions and deep feelings like love, hate, or indifference. She can understand the nuances of behavior and read through them better than her husband; that’s why she is placed over the home, a “house-despot,” as the Bible calls her, because that’s her realm, her sphere of sovereignty. A woman can understand people better than a man, because she has that ability from the beginning…”

…So God prohibited women from leading men? And nowhere does the Bible give women sovereignty over any part of married life. This is pedestalization. Truth is, modern Western women have the interpersonal skills of botfly larvae. Many of them even look like maggots: bulging fat and hairless.

“Ironically, despite of the resurgence of the interest in the Christian family in the last decades, the churches have failed to produce Christian families.”

That’s because the problem is YOU, dear leader. Not us.

“Like the missionary above, many churches in the US have seen the same – or increased – divorce rate, irresponsible fathers and husbands, children who leave the faith, and young women who can’t find Christian husbands.”

It’s always the man’s fault.

“The family as created and ordained by God can not be defined outside of the Dominion Covenant.”

Psycho-babbling like this is why I won’t ever learn a catechism. This is Christian family: one man, one woman, banging each other frequently and exclusively, with the man in charge of everything. If they make kids then they raise the kids. Done. No need to discuss family creation, ordination, definition or whatever that other thing is.

Over-complicate the really easy stuff, so the subtle & complex aspects of Faith are utterly impossible to discern without wholly rejecting everyone you are trying to learn from. It’s a great way to kill souls. Which is mostly the point.

You are in luck JDG, I am doing an entire podcast on “Game” this week as a build up to my Pulitzer Prize winning multi episode series on “Dread Game” that will conclude my Married Red Pill Basic Class. It’s not great- but it’s good.

“Game” is a set of behavioral adaptations designed to create and facilitate positive reactions in the opposite sex that are often focused on seduction tactics and commonly associated with Pick Up Artistry as it developed in the 1990’s. In short, “Game” is what gets you laid. Some guys have great fun with Beta Game- it can be combined with the “Charmer” to be very seductive- but usually not. Betas are the penultimate losers in the mating game because Alpha’s get the ladies. Alpha Game is aping or mimicking the Alpha Male characteristics known to get women wet.

Every man and every woman has his or her unique version of “Game” that you run with sexual partners. Every…single…person…uses “Game.” He may not use it right. He may not think he is using it, but by definition, when you try to get laid you are running “Game.”

A person can improve his Game with practice and by studying various secret tomes available on amazon such as “The Rational Male, “The Book of Pook” and “No More Mr. Nice Guy.” The underlying theme of each of these books is that to attract women a man has to be attractive.

An attractive man is confident, strong, masculine, in charge guy who is fun to be around, and has a mission in life that he is pursuing. You develop your “Game” by increasing your actual attraction levels as well as your ability to mimic and project an elevated image of these attractants.

On the 14 year old posing as a 19 year old. 100% possible. I wouldn’t be surprised if the girl had more sexual partners than the 29 y/o guy. Tinder slut. Runs away for the weekend to get dick. I am sure it was the first time. Right.

Also, what’s up with @ASDGamer and @JDG and @Gemini? Is this about that Game thingy or was there some other disagreement I missed? Somebody is Bluepill and some police officer is going full straw man? I just know somebody is going to get accused of Heresy………….Actually we already had the Gnostic Heresy discussed so, yah.

There is a massive disconnect between the Bible/doctrine and Christian culture, and for nearly all Christians the culture is where the identity comes from.

That’s why I’m so grateful to have found the sphere and this blog especially. If I hadn’t, I would have never likely never known that there was an alternative to the Mark Driscolls / Glenn Stantons / Kendrick brothers / FOTFs of the world.

““The family as created and ordained by God can not be defined outside of the Dominion Covenant.”

Psycho-babbling like this is….”

Genesis 1:26 – 28 is not psycho-babble and it was not done away with by the New Covenant.

Church growth by way of having large families is a very neglected strategy which few outside of the Amish practice. Sex is the main reason to get married but not the only reason. Sex without birth control will result in large families for most couples. God wants almost all women to marry and bear children and guide the house, I Timothy 5:14.

“You can only financially afford to raise one or two kids” is a technique used by tree huggers to limit population growth. Christian families should not limit themselves by concerns about paying all the college costs for their kids.

My mother was more catholic than the pope. She despised all and any form of birth control. Hence I am one of her seven children. She had polio before I was born and had 6 miscarriages before she had me and two other children, so she was pregnant 13 times over 22 years. What did the woman with 13 children call her menstruation? The blessing. The doctors had told her she would not be able to walk or have more children. She said, I will show you.

Anyway, her teaching to all of us children is that it costs the same to raise one child as it does to raise a dozen: 100% of everything you have.

“Church growth by way of having large families is a very neglected strategy which few outside of the Amish practice.”

Neglected for good reason. Christ wants us to preach the gospel and make new disciples, not turtle up in isolated communities. Not only did Christ say nothing about having kids, He recommends via Paul that people not get married at all.

Christianity is not an in-club. It is not a numbers game. And it cannot be inherited.

I can answer yes, no and no, and still say that GunnerQ is wrong. We are meant to be fruitful and multiply. If anything, it would be better if my answers were opposite. We need more Christian babies, and contra his claim, it can be inherited if you don’t let anti-Christians school your kids.